1. Volume 80, Issue 5, Pages 2248-2261 (May 2001)
Hydration State of Single Cytochrome c Monolayers on Soft Interfaces via Neutron Interferometry 
L.R. Kneller, A.M. Edwards, C.E. Nordgren, J.K. Blasie, N.F. Berk, S. Krueger, C.F. Majkrzak 
Biophysical Journal 
Volume 80, Issue 5, Pages (May 2001)
DOI: /S (01)
Copyright © 2001 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

2. Figure 1
Neutron scattering length densities for polarized neutrons depends on the polarization of the incident neutrons relative to the direction of magnetization of the ferromagnetic material. For iron, the scattering length density is either 3.0×10−6Å−2 for antiparallel spins or 13.0×10−6Å−2 for parallel spins, relative to the spin-independent scattering length density of 2.1×10−6Å−2 for Si.
Biophysical Journal  , DOI: ( /S (01) )
Copyright © 2001 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

3. Figure 2
Schematic of the nonpolar SAM/cytochrome c system on the Fe/Si multilayer substrate (top) and the uncharged-polar SAM/cytochrome c system on the Fe/Au/Si multilayer substrate (bottom). The protein is shown as a representation of its x-ray crystal structure. The hydrocarbon chains of the SAM are tilted arbitrarily, and the tilt has not been investigated here.
Biophysical Journal  , DOI: ( /S (01) )
Copyright © 2001 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

4. Figure 3
Neutron reflectivity at θ=0.8° (qz= Å−1) monitored during changeover from D2O to H2O for the nonpolar SAM case.
Biophysical Journal  , DOI: ( /S (01) )
Copyright © 2001 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

5. Figure 4
(A) Raw reflectivities for the bare multilayer substrate, substrate plus nonpolar SAM plus YCC/D2O, and substrate plus nonpolar SAM plus YCC/H2O (top) and similarly for the substrate plus uncharged-polar SAM plus YCC (bottom) for the incident neutron spins parallel to the iron magnetization. The H2O data are offset by 10−5 and the D2O data by 10−10 units on the ordinate. (B) Normalized reflectivity data for the bare multilayer substrate, substrate plus nonpolar SAM plus YCC/D2O, and substrate plus nonpolar SAM plus YCC/H2O (top) and similarly for the substrate plus uncharged-polar SAM plus YCC (bottom) for the incident neutron spins parallel to the iron magnetization. In the top plot the H2O data are offset by 150 units and the D2O data by 300 units on the ordinate and in the bottom plot the H2O data are offset by 75 units and the D2O data by 150 units on the ordinate.
Biophysical Journal  , DOI: ( /S (01) )
Copyright © 2001 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

6. Figure 5
The gradients of the neutron scattering density profiles [dρ/dz]exp for both the nonpolar SAM for partial hydration with H2O (A) and D2O (B) and uncharged-polar SAM cases for partial hydration with H2O (C) and D2O (D), as determined by the constrained refinement implementation of the interferometric phasing of their respective normalized neutron reflectivity data. The incident neutron spins were parallel to the magnetization of the Fe layer in all cases shown. The integration of [dρ/dz]exp to provide, respectively, the absolute neutron scattering density profile ρexp(z) for each case was achieved via a real-space model refinement of a parameterized model for ρmod(z) until [dρ/dz]mod reached perfect agreement with the corresponding [dρ/dz]exp is also shown here.
Biophysical Journal  , DOI: ( /S (01) )
Copyright © 2001 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

7. Figure 6
The absolute neutron scattering length density profiles with incident neutron spins parallel to the iron magnetization for partial hydration with D2O and H2O and their difference profile for both the nonpolar SAM (A) and uncharged-polar SAM (B) cases. The boundaries for the cytochrome c protein region of the profiles used for calculation of the amount of water hydrating the protein are z=10Å and z=60Å. A schematic of the composite structures for both the nonpolar SAM and uncharged-polar SAM cases are shown above the absolute neutron scattering length density profiles approximately to scale.
Biophysical Journal  , DOI: ( /S (01) )
Copyright © 2001 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

8. Figure 7
The neutron scattering length density profile for the D2O case for both the nonpolar SAM and the uncharged-polar SAM as compared with the corresponding electron density profile determined previously by x-ray interferometry. The electron density profile shown was for the case of an all-thiol endgroup SAM, which would be comparable in polarity to the uncharged-polar SAM employed in these neutron interferometry studies. Given the very different physical origin of x-ray and neutron scattering, the amplitude of the electron density profile has been arbitrarily scaled here to best match those of the neutron scattering length density profiles. The spatial resolution, here taken as the minimum wavelength Fourier component, for the two neutron scattering length density profiles (namely, ∼16Å and ∼21Å, respectively, for the nonpolar and uncharged-polar SAMs) was substantially less than that for the electron density profile (namely, ∼10Å). More importantly, in terms of the different spatial resolutions, the centers of mass of the cytochrome c molecules occur at the same distance from the substrate surface, namely, ∼30Å, for the electron density profile and the neutron scattering length density profile for the uncharged-polar SAM profile, and at only a slightly larger value of 33–34Å for the nonpolar SAM case. These key distances are readily resolved in all three profiles.
Biophysical Journal  , DOI: ( /S (01) )
Copyright © 2001 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

9. Figure 8
Time-averaged water distribution profiles (solid, scaled arbitrarily) from the Molecular Dynamics computer simulations for yeast cytochrome c covalently tethered to the soft surface the nonpolar SAM (top) and the uncharged-polar SAM (bottom). These simulated atomic-resolution profiles were convoluted with the spatial resolution function appropriate for the experimentally determined water distribution profiles yielding the corresponding resolution-limited profiles (short dashed line) from the simulations. The experimentally determined water distribution profiles are shown in long dashes (units of 10−6Å−2). At this point in the simulations, there is only qualitative agreement between the simulations and experiment (see text) most likely arising from insufficient disorder in the model employed for the SAMs.
Biophysical Journal  , DOI: ( /S (01) )
Copyright © 2001 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

10. Figure 9
An instantaneous configuration at 1400ps from the Molecular Dynamics computer simulations for yeast cytochrome c covalently tethered to the soft surface of the uncharged-polar SAM (top) for a water/cytochrome c mole ratio of 100:1, following equilibration of the ensemble over 1300ps (yellow-sulfur, gray-carbon, white-hydrogen, red-oxygen, blue-nitrogen, green-chloride). The upper half of the lower portion contains the calculated electron density profiles for the SAM (black), the cytochrome c (green), the cytochrome heme group (red), and the hydrating water (blue) averaged over 200ps of the trajectory following the 1300-ps equilibration of the ensemble. The lower half of the lower portion contains the corresponding profiles calculated from the Molecular Dynamics simulations for the uncharged-polar SAM case, but inverted to utilize the same abscissa and thereby facilitate the comparison of the two SAM cases. The different positions of the cytochrome c profile relative to the substrate surface for the two SAM cases is readily apparent and in excellent agreement with the experimental neutron scattering length density profiles shown in Fig. 7.
Biophysical Journal  , DOI: ( /S (01) )
Copyright © 2001 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

11. Figure 10
Normalized reflectivity for the bare Fe/Si substrate used for measurements of cytochrome c on the nonpolar SAM (A1a) and the Patterson function calculated from the reflectivity (inset, A2b).
Biophysical Journal  , DOI: ( /S (01) )
Copyright © 2001 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

12. Figure 11
(A3c) Model produced in the model refinement procedure. This model was differentiated and then Fourier transformed/inverse Fourier transformed to produce the trial function (A3d) for highly constrained box refinement. (A4) Comparison of the normalized reflectivities calculated from the trial structure (A4e) and the constrained refinement output (A4f) with the experimental normalized reflectivity (A4a).
Biophysical Journal  , DOI: ( /S (01) )
Copyright © 2001 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

13. Figure 12
(A5g) Neutron scattering length density gradient obtained from highly constrained box refinement. A neutron scattering length density was constructed using model refinement (A5h). The scattering length density gradient was set to zero outside of its internal structure and used as a trial reference profile for refinement of the composite substrate plus SAM plus protein structure.
Biophysical Journal  , DOI: ( /S (01) )
Copyright © 2001 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

14. Figure 13
Normalized reflectivity for the composite substrate plus SAM plus protein/D2O system (A6j) and the Patterson function calculated from this reflectivity (inset, A7k). (A8) Comparison of the experimental (A8j) and calculated normalized reflectivities (A8m and A8n). The reflectivity of the trial structure is shown as a dashed line, and the calculated reflectivities for each iteration of the refinement are shown in gray. Note that the refinement converges after five iterations.
Biophysical Journal  , DOI: ( /S (01) )
Copyright © 2001 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

15. Figure 14
The final neutron scattering length density models for the bare substrate (A9h) and the composite system (A9o).
Biophysical Journal  , DOI: ( /S (01) )
Copyright © 2001 The Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions